Are you complaining that GT has more democrats than republicans? I'm pretty sure that membership to the board simply requires one to sign up, so I don't believe that GT is attempting to create a purely Dem populated board...unless you're saying that the ability to read simple instructions posted in English is beyond the capabilities of your average republican (or any other political group), thus discriminatory in this instance.

If it's bothersome to you, have you tried to look around at other boards that might be more heavily weighted towards GOP members? I'm betting there's more than a few. Or perhaps one with a more Libertarian slant, if that party is more appealing to you?

I'm not sure what can be done to even out the number of democrats vs. republicans vs. libertarians vs. wigs (whoops...sorry...wrong country) short of setting limits on GT. If you ask KD nicely, perhaps he'll institute one? We could nicely ask new registrants what their party affiliation is and if they say "democrat" for example, and the monthly limit has been reached, KD can tell them that they need to go elsewhere as the Inn is closed.

p.s. if you were actually objective, you'd realize that most of the claims in that article, while technically true, are also presented without any context to explain them. something that both sides do when they want to make the other one look bad in "comedy" pieces like this. For example, check out the death toll of American soldiers in Iraq to get some insight into the Afghanistan numbers.

But anyway, congratulations on being the first human in existence to discover that sometimes politics plays with the facts!

« Last Edit: February 12, 2013, 06:38:28 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

The lady doth protest too much. My point is you can be partisan but you don't have to be hypocritical. If something is offensive when a republican is in the WH it should be when a Dem is as well..and warrant as much discussion.

And for the record, I'm an Independent. I'm not a part of the GOP nor did I vote that way in the last election.

I prefer to think of myself as a 'Fabutarian', so I only voted for PeteRock. of course the polling place got upset when I wrote in his name using a glitter pen. apparently it is tough to clean that stuff off of those touch screens...

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

Did you vote all over the ticket? Do you ever come down on Democratic policies?

Nope. Doesn't change the fact that I'm an independent now.

Okey dokey. My point is made.

Nope, it's not. Voting all over the place doesn't automatically equal independent.

You apparently aren't actually familiar with the definition of an independent, so let me help you out:

Quote

ndependents may hold a centrist viewpoint between those of major political parties. Sometimes they hold a viewpoint more extreme than any major party, or they may have a viewpoint based on issues that they do not feel that any major party addresses.

Other independent politicians may be associated with a political party, be former members of it, or have views that align with it, but choose not to stand under its label. Others may belong to or support a political party but believe they should not formally represent it and thus be subject to its policies.

Just because I have always voted Democrat doesn't mean I'm not independent. That just means they met my needs at the time.

I'm an independent. I just wasn't aware of it until I realized it simply means you can always complain about others...even those you may have voted for at one point...while seemingly above it all.

p.s. how's this work now that I've come out? will i get a special ring? a bumper sticker that reads, "Everyone else is wrong!" are there dues?

« Last Edit: February 12, 2013, 07:22:26 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

To get back to the list and away from the silly squabbling, I don't know that you'll find too many Democrats who aren't seriously dismayed by some of the things Obama has done or failed to do (e.g. the drone strikes, the memo about killing Americans without due process, not shutting down Guantanamo).

To get back to the list and away from the silly squabbling, I don't know that you'll find too many Democrats who aren't seriously dismayed by some of the things Obama has done or failed to do (e.g. the drone strikes, the memo about killing Americans without due process, not shutting down Guantanamo).

And that was actually mentioned in the post about sanctioned drone attacks on american citizens in another thread. I just get annoyed with the snarky way ATB tries to start these "conversations".

Yes, I don't agree with some of the things Obama does. Just as I haven't always agreed with everything every president I've voted for has done. Contrary to what some folks would like you to believe, that's hardly ever the case for anyone.

However, that list is a bit disingenuous as it overlooks some of the context behind the "facts" it tries employ for comedic affect. It also assumes that every democrat in the US has acted in exactly the same manner to each item (when applicable). A few seconds of research reveals that there have been plenty of protests (yes, by democrats) against the items listed by the writer(s) of that comedy piece.

« Last Edit: February 12, 2013, 07:48:50 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

Well, let's check the record. Here's what I was saying about it in 2007:

Quote from: Autistic Angel on June 05, 2007, 09:29:19 PM

Quote from: Eduardo X

I think that's BS. What kind of fight would it have been? Who would have invested in it with the US? Just because almost 3000 people from the US died doesn't mean the world was unified. Even when 200,000 died after the tsunami, the corruption and stupidity of the world was on the ground to stop help within days. 9/11 was no different.

Following the 9/11 attacks, NATO invoked Article 5 which resolved that this unprovoked attack against the United States would be treated as an attack against every member nation. This is the primary reason that American troops to this day are serving alongside soldiers from nations like France, Germany, Canada, Norway, the Netherlands, Romania, and Portugal -- all nations which have steered clear of the situtation in Iraq.

The decision to go to war in Afghanistan enjoyed *tremendous* global support in 2001 and 2002 because that nation was inextricably linked to the 9/11 attacks. However, that support rapidly started to wane once the United States tried to divert that enthusiasm towards invading Iraq. If the U.S. had devoted itself 100% towards securing Afghanistan rather than redirecting such a huge percentage of its military towards the Iraq War, it seems very likely to me that the situation there would be vastly improved over its current state.

Here's how Barack Obama campaign for president in 2008:

Quote from: Barack Obama, July 2008, via The New York Times

That’s why I strongly stand by my plan to end [the Iraq] war. Now, Prime Minister Maliki’s call for a timetable for the removal of U.S. forces presents a real opportunity. It comes at a time when the American general in charge of training Iraq’s Security Forces has testified that Iraq’s Army and Police will be ready to assume responsibility for Iraq’s security in 2009. Now is the time for a responsible redeployment of our combat troops that pushes Iraq’s leaders toward a political solution, rebuilds our military, and refocuses on Afghanistan and our broader security interests.

But aside from the fact that I spent years arguing in favor of finishing the job in Afghanistan and voted for Barack Obama's explicit promise to do exactly that, yeah, ATB's exhaustively reasoned article really nails my hypocrisy for not being angrier about it.

But aside from the fact that I spent years arguing in favor of finishing the job in Afghanistan and voted for Barack Obama's explicit promise to do exactly that, yeah, ATB's exhaustively reasoned article really nails my hypocrisy for not being angrier about it.

-Autistic Angel

I saw absolutely no evidence of reason or critical thinking being used to create that article. It's almost as if it were made for a Junior High crowd.

Logged

" And they are a strong and frightening force, impervious to, and immunized against, the feeble lance of mere reason." Isaac Asimov

But aside from the fact that I spent years arguing in favor of finishing the job in Afghanistan and voted for Barack Obama's explicit promise to do exactly that, yeah, ATB's exhaustively reasoned article really nails my hypocrisy for not being angrier about it.

I saw absolutely no evidence of reason or critical thinking being used to create that article. It's almost as if it were made for a Junior High crowd.

Oh, it's perfectly idiotic. If my sarcasm was unclear, this is nothing but some Conservative with an axe to grind and zero understanding of the policies he's attacking tossing out facile assertions without any regard for the facts. Now liberals are supposed to run themselves ragged disproving these "arguments" while Conservatives shrug it all off on their way to embrace the next conspiracy theory.

But aside from the fact that I spent years arguing in favor of finishing the job in Afghanistan and voted for Barack Obama's explicit promise to do exactly that, yeah, ATB's exhaustively reasoned article really nails my hypocrisy for not being angrier about it.

I saw absolutely no evidence of reason or critical thinking being used to create that article. It's almost as if it were made for a Junior High crowd.

Oh, it's perfectly idiotic. If my sarcasm was unclear, this is nothing but some Conservative with an axe to grind and zero understanding of the policies he's attacking tossing out facile assertions without any regard for the facts. Now liberals are supposed to run themselves ragged disproving these "arguments" while Conservatives shrug it all off on their way to embrace the next conspiracy theory.